Mr. ROYFE. I think there are several sources. Uniform Crime Reports, for example, which examines cities in the United States with a population of roughly one-quarter of the whole population estimates there were about 250,000 delinquents in the cities reporting in 1957. If you multiply that figure by 4 you come close to the million mark.

Senator CLARK. Per year?

Mr. ROYFE. Per year.

Senator CLARK. Which may include a great number of repeaters. Mr. ROYFE. Possibly. However, I think there are many that are not repeaters.

Senator CLARK. I see here you have reference to an appropriate salary range. The figure would be helpful when we have the bill before us if on the basis of your wide experience you would give us some idea of what you think salaries ranges would be.

Mr. ROYFE. I think if you stipulated in this legislation that you required a community to adhere to the standards that have been put forth by the Federal Government, for example, in the salary ranges of social workers employed in the Veterans Administration, you may be able to recruit a good many capable people.

Senator CLARK. Can you give us the general range of that?

Mr. ROYFE. The beginning salary of a social worker in the Veterans' Administration is about $4,980 per year and the scale goes up I think to about $11,090.

I think a salary range such as this will attract capable people. In many of our communities we have extremely low salary ranges for social workers and we attract people who are not professionally trained or who change their jobs frequently.

Senator CLARK. Do you have any experience as to whether the range in voluntary agencies is lower than in the governmental agencies?

Mr. ROYFE. I am happy to say that the Federal Government has always acted as an advance guard in raising the salary ranges, and that many of our private agencies have had to follow the Government's lead because there has been tremendous competition for this group of trained social workers. I think this has been a very creditable thing that the Federal Government has done.

Senator CLARK. What is your definition of a trained social worker? Mr. ROYFE. By a trained social worker I mean someone who has a masters degree in social service and comes from a recognized school of social work.

A bill which would appropriate $5 million annually for training personnel could only turn out approximately 800 social workers per year. Among these 800 social workers, there would be about 70 percent women; they marry, they leave the field and have children and another sizable group leaves the field because of low income; I wanted to point out that the problem in recruiting and training adequate numbers of professionals to cope with this problem is of a tremendous scope.

I do not mean to say that only social workers can deal with this problem, there are others, but social workers are most close to delinquency needs in a community through their training and experience. Senator CLARK. I am in complete agreement with what you say,

but this is only one of the areas in our overall economy lacking vitally needed personnel who are not being recruited and when recruited often do not have the necessary qualifications because of the compensation factor. The same thing applies in the teaching profession. It is extraordinary how much a young man can get if he goes into advertising or color television and how little he receives as a teacher or social worker.

Mr. ROYFE. An interesting thing occurred in the past year or so. Several States have passed community services act bills which made available matching funds to communities which would establish childguidance clinics. This is true in New York and New Jersey. As a result salary scales were increased in these facilities because they had the wherewithal to attract personnel. Social workers left family agencies and went to mental hygiene clinics who had these funds.

What resulted was that because of these higher salaries additional people were attracted into the field of social work. So for the first time in almost a decade our social work schools had an increase in enrollment.

What I am saying is, if we increase our salary scales we will attract more people into the field.

I am also proposing that the funds which you appropriate be for a reasonable period of time. I think this is extremely important when we consider that many of our welfare workers change their jobs on the average of every 2 years, it takes about a year to become accustomed to a situation and after 1 additional year they leave; this is because they are running around seeking to get a couple of hundred dollars here and there rather than viewing a position as a long-range program.

Senator CLARK. Do you include in those figures of turnover the women who leave to get married?

Mr. ROYFE. I think the New York School of Social Work, which is part of Columbia University conducted a study of all its graduates several years ago. In this study they learned that the average graduate changed jobs every 2 years. I do not think this included marriage leaves.

I mention in this report that I think it essential that all projects be carefully supervised so the funds are not dissipated in supporting or supplementing the budgets of existing programs. You are well aware, I am sure, that it is quite simple for many agencies to lay claim to the fact that they are preventing delinquency without necessarily establishing additional services.

I am saying this because I know of the dire circumstances that many of our governmental and private agencies are faced with and I think it important that we supervise this program in such a way that we create new services and not serve to aid the financing of presently existing welfare programs.

I was also pleased to learn that contained within much of this legislation was a desire to coordinate the planning among our public and voluntary agencies. Because of the many contributing factors to delinquent behavior, this is essential if we are to come to grips with solving this problem.

We often find that Government and private agencies do not talk to one another and that our coordinating councils in our various cities

meet infrequently. Often there is no over-all plan for coping with many of our welfare situations, nor is there a clear understanding of the functions of many of our governmental agencies. Many times, because we do not know what a specific function of a Government agency is, we tend to blame it for one thing or another without understanding its real purpose.

In granting funds for these programs, I would like to tell you that many of our private agencies throughout the United States are in dire economic straits. Our United Funds and Community Chests throughout the country raise a total of only $400 million, which supports the bulk of our private welfare and health agencies. These groups are currently faced in many localities with an inability to expand their services.

During the year 1958, in which we had a brief recession, many of our chests raised less funds than they did during 1957, despite the fact that due to the recession there was an increased need.

Senator CLARK. Would you agree with me that as a practical matter we are coming to the end of the road in increasing the sums which our Community Chests can raise?

Mr. ROYFE. It is pathetic to say that this is probably so in many

areas.

Senator CLARK. This is not because of any lack of resources but because the overwhelming majority of the American people are not trained and do not seem to wish to be trained in making charitable contributions.

Mr. ROYFE. When we consider that we have a gross national production of $440 billion and we contribute only one-tenth of 1 percent to our Community Chest, it is pretty sad.

Senator CLARK. The last time I saw the figures they were that while an individual is entitled to deduct 20 percent or in certain circumstances 30 percent of his income for tax purposes as charitable gifts the general average is in the neighborhood of 2 or 3 percent.

Mr. ROYFE. If it was a true 2 or 3 percent, I think we would meet many of our needs. There was once a proposal that the Government give the 2 or 3 percent directly to welfare organizations and then charge the taxpayers.

Senator CLARK. Of course we have to give you a caveat that one of the big problems that faces this committee is how the total load of coping with juvenile delinquency should be divided between private agencies and the municipal governments, the State governments, and Federal Government, and there is still a strong feeling in this Congress that this is primarily a local and not a national problem. I personally do not agree with it, but my guess is that that is the predominant view at the moment.

Mr. ROYFE. I think there is room for private agencies as well as governmental. I think private agencies sometimes have a greater degree of flexibility and a greater degree to experiment with new

methods.

On the other hand I have seen some extrmely crditable work on the part of governmental agencies in new fields such as the Highfields experiment in New Jersey in which delinquents live in a group situation. So I think there is room for both governmental and private agencies in sharing in this as long as there is supervision, clasification and joint purpose in mind.

I wanted to point out that the lack of united funds makes it extremely difficult for many of our private agencies to be able to utilize matching funds from governmental agencies were they available.

For example, there are presently about 50 communities in the United States which are seeking to develop a Big Brother service, but because of the lack of $20,000, in each of these communities they cannot develop such an agency. Now, $20,000 multiplied by 50 agencies is about $1 million. There is just not that extra $1 million available from private resources to develop these agencies today.

I think governmental support would make possible these services in many communities. And this goes for Big Brother service as well as other agencies that deal with the delinquency problem.

In coming to grips with the magnitude of the problem and the possible costs that it may entail, it is estimated that 25 percent of the delinquents are emotionally disturbed. This is generally the group from the middle-income classes rather than from the low-income classes and there are many reasons for that. But the cost of treating a child and his family in a child guidance clinic today is approximately $1,000 per year for child and parents. If we treated 250,000 delinquents, or 25 percent of this total group, it would entail an expenditure of a quarter of a billion dollars a year for this therapeutic program alone.

Similarly, if we were capable of assigning a "big brother" to 75 percent of all of the delinquents who lacked a father it would cost $150 million a year to supervise approximately 750,000 "big brother-little brother" relationships.

Senator CLARK. Do you think you could recruit the "big brothers"? Mr. ROYFE. I think it would take a tremendous effort to recruit that many.

Senator CLARK. I doubt if you could do it.

Mr. ROYFE. I think if we had the ability to organize agencies and to gain national publicity, I think we could come to grips with the problem by recruiting much more than we have in the past, and I know that the boards of our new agencies have been able in many instances to recruit people in a community to staff their agency needs. I think if more agencies were created, additional "big brothers" could be recruited.

In conclusion, I would like to state that we are maturing to the point of recognizing that juvenile delinquency represents normviolating behavior and that its seriousness, its form, frequency, and relation to a person's behavior are important to consider in treating the individual. I am glad to say that we have learned that we cannot solve our delinquency problems simply through a punitive approach, curfews, physical playgrounds, or clearing slums alone. What is needed is to put the technical knowledge we presently possess to work at an expanded and accelerated pace. Secondly, we have to develop additional trained personnel who will utilize this knowledge, staff the new programs, and benefit from research which should be concomitant to the program.

Senator CLARK. Thank you very much, sir.

I take it that the whole burden of your testimony is that our first priority should be in appropriations to recruiting and training social work personnel.

Mr. ROYFE. I think that concomitant with this should be the expansion of already existing services which can cope with the problem. Many communities lack child guidance clinics, school systems lack diagnostic facilities, communities lack "detached workers" to serve with gangs.

We presently have these tools to cope with the problem but we do not have the wherewithal in many of our communities for these

programs.

Senator CLARK. In general, you feel that the progress of the art has developed sufficiently so we know what to do about juvenile delinquency, but we are not devoting the necessary resources to it? Mr. ROYFE. I think there is much to be learned, but I think we already have in our armamentarium a group of tools but are not applying it.

Senator CLARK. We have had a good deal of testimony from other witnesses indicating some bafflement as to the approach to the greatest contribution that the Federal Government could make at the present time, particularly in view of the currency of what I like to call budgetitis. Should it be to make a relatively small amount of money available for further research and for the trying out of pilot projects? I take it you would not agree with that?

Mr. ROYFE. Correct. I think there is room for research and pilot projects, but I think there is also a necessity for crash projects. Senator CLARK. I take it if I asked you how would you raise the necessary money, you would say that that was outside of your scope? Mr. ROYFE. No, I think if the American people are seriously concerned with delinquency, they ought to take the responsibility for it. I think we can well lose our democracy.

At the present time I know that people are afraid to walk down the main streets of their cities at night.

Seantor CLARK. We can agree with that, but that is not a specific recommendation as to where we will raise the taxes.

Mr. ROYFE. Well, I think this is as important an item as defense. Senator CLARK. You still have not told us how to raise the money. Mr. ROYFE. I think it would have to be through taxes. Private welfare cannot meet the load alone.

Senator CLARK. Thank you very much, Mr. Royfe.
Senator CLARK. Is Mr. Granger here?

Mr. TUCKER. I am here representing Mr. Granger.

Senator CLARK. Would you come forward and give us your name and qualifications.

STATEMENT OF STERLING TUCKER, DIRECTOR, WASHINGTON URBAN LEAGUE

Mr. TUCKER. My name is Sterling Tucker. I am the Washington representative of the National Urban League and director of the Washington Urban League.

Senator CLARK. This statement which you have with you is your own statement?

Mr. TUCKER. Yes; as a representative of the National Urban League. Mr. Granger has dispatched me as his emissary today. He is in California.